Navigate:

Roy Blunt: The new culture warrior

Blunt says his new role as social conservative hero was unscripted. | John Shinkle/POLITICO

His political skills were on display almost from the moment he arrived in the lower chamber in 1997. He quickly aligned himself with DeLay, the then-majority whip, and by 1999, DeLay had made him his top lieutenant. When DeLay ascended to majority leader in 2003, Blunt won DeLay’s old job as chief vote counter.

DeLay, nicknamed “the Hammer” for his ability to get his members in line, handed his successor a velvet-covered hammer, a nod to Blunt’s softer touch. Blunt briefly served as interim majority leader after DeLay stepped aside amid a criminal probe. But in an upset, he was narrowly defeated by John Boehner in a race for the permanent No. 2 job. And he later stepped down from his leadership post, avoiding a challenge from his top deputy, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.).

Text Size

-

+

reset

His social conservative allies see Blunt’s return to leadership — and the political spotlight — as evidence of his deft ability to build coalitions, delve into legislative details and possess a broader understanding of “how everything fits in the bigger mosaic.” Indeed, GOP presidential front-runner Mitt Romney recognized those traits in Blunt, tapping him as his chief liaison and advocate on Capitol Hill.

“I absolutely believe at some point he could become majority leader,” said Grace-Marie Turner, president of the Galen Institute, a conservative think tank that has worked closely with Blunt on health care issues.

“I think he will rise up the leadership ladder,” added Doug Johnson, a lobbyist with National Right to Life who has known Blunt since he first won election to the House.

Though he recently won his leadership post, an obvious move for Blunt after the November election will be to run for chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. It’s a post previously held by now-Republican leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and currently held by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who’s widely favored in the race to become GOP whip.

But Blunt dismissed any suggestion that he’s eager to move up the leadership ladder or that he’d consider running Senate Republicans’ campaign arm.

Santorum’s idea to “revive’ housing by getting rid of Freddie and Fannie is cockeyed:

When people can borrow more mortgage money more cheaply than they otherwise could, thanks to Fan and Fred’s government backing, that money pushes up housing prices. It has nowhere else to go.

Conversely, getting rid of Fannie and Freddie would push down housing prices, as houses would lose a big part of their government subsidy.

His other housing idea is no better: “The second proposal — to allow homeowners to deduct home-sale losses against their taxes — is at odds with, well, a lot of things. It’s at odds with simplifying the tax code .... It’s at odds with practicality. ... It’s at odds with Santorum’s opposition to bailouts. ...

This isn’t the only indication that Santorum is confused about economics. His support for a zero tax-rate for manufacturing has been panned by everyone from former Obama official Christine Romer to legions of free market economists.

And his pronouncement that the 2008 recession was caused by rising gas prices is a view shared by practically no one. ...

As a fiscal conservative with libertarian leanings, I hate the culture warrior stuff, both sides. Keep the federal government out of people's social lives. That said, I see nothing wrong with Blunt's proposal. Insurance is about risk. With health insurance, the risk is disease or injury. Assuming the government has any power to impose mandates, the only mandate that should be required is for basic major medical coverage.. Beyond that, people should be able to choose and pay for what additional coverage they may want. The government has no business making these decisions for people.

Now on top of not helping to fix Tunnels leaking from decay, Bridges falling from neglect, Sewers unkempt, these so-called Religious Institutions want to claim the same 1st Amendment rights as a single voter?

In the age of the TV-Mega-Church = I say If they want into the Political & Policy Fray Then "Pay Taxes."

The Constitution is for "Individual Freedoms of (not from) Religion" & Never was for these "Institutions" =

as long as those workers have a "Choice of Benefits" then These Church Profiteering Institutions must provide the same as other "Profiteering Institutions."

A Catholic woman may not want contraceptives in her "HC Policy" & a Baptist woman may need them for Cancer Treatment; yet, wherever either works must have the choice available.

But for many hardworking families, affordable insurance can be hard to find. The new "Penny Health" is giving you more control over your family’s health care by expanding your options for health insurance and making them more affordable.

He voluntarily stepped into the role of Neanderthal on this subject and if his bill reflects his views he should face the heat. The GOP has been marching towards the cliff for the last few years and now realizes that the only hope they have is to tell the voters " we fought for what we believed no matter how extreme it was". We did it for you. :) LOL

These politicians need to stop. We need to maintain Seperation of Church and State. Religions of all faiths are not required to pay taxes and that's fine, however if a church decides that it wants to go into a business of any sort they (the business) should be treated as any other business PAY TAXES!!! If they don't want to pay taxes, DON'T GET INTO BUSINESS!!!!

Our politicians need to get out of womens rights. Women should decide what happens to themselves, not some Congressman or Senator sitting with a lobbist working for heathcare or one from the church. These politicians once again are working for the interest of the lobbist for the Insurance Companys and Corporations. Insurance companys don't want to pay for things such as birth control and leaving this up to business is absurd. What company will give their employees anything that might cost them money. And leaving it up to your boss to decide what's going to happen to your wife is the stupidist thing I could ever think of.

I'm tired of politicians using religion as their excuse to not allow a bill to be passed. I'm tired of a church trying to dictate what our politicians decide on a bill vote. Womens rights are exactly that womens rights. If a church doesn't agree with something, that's ok they are FREE to feel anyway they like. If 95% of the women that belong to their church don't follow their teachings then maybe they should CHANGE THEIR TEACHINGS. I'm a Methodist and it makes me angry that the Catholic Church can demand a law to be changed that effects me, my wife or my family. Why should my wife or my daughter go without or suffer because of someone elses religion. This is one reason for The Seperation of Church and State.

These politicians need to stop working for Corporations, the 1%, lobbists and special interest groups and start doing the jobs that they were elected to do. They are elected BY the people to work in the best interest FOR the people. If they do not want to do the job they were elected to do, then it's time we replace them with those who do.

In the age of the TV-Mega-Church = I say If they want into the Political & Policy Fray Then "Pay Taxes."

_______________________________________________________

Really?

Do you feel the same about MEDIA MATTERS?

Think tanks owe their existence to tax exempt foundations such as Soros Funded.

How about The Rockefeller, Carnegie and Ford Foundations, the Council on Foreign Relations, The Schumann and MacArthur Foundations, The Soros Foundation, The Trilateral Commission, the Streisand Foundation and the Carlyle Group?

How about Podesta and his and Soros Think TANK?

What do they provide the POOR?....Why don't they pay taxes?

There are at least 100 major American corporations in which foundations owned at least 20 per cent of the stock.

What do they provide in hospital care?

PLANNED PARENTHOOD PAYS EXECS $15 MILLION TO....SERVE THE POOR.

This is NOT about the PILL.

The media keeps the Focus on the PILL when it's about the first amendment.

The media knows they have to keep the focus on the... "Word".... Contraceptives ..otherwise they lose the battle.

Shame on you Politico. You fell for it. This is exactly what Blunt wanted, publicity, "Culture Warrior" you played right into his hands. He's been looking for a hook to hang his hat on to get back in front of the cameras since he was pushed aside after Tom Delay. You made that possible today. The more publicity you give him, the better chance he has to try and play an important role in the Senate. This despicable politician has never done a day's work in his adult life unless you count a short stint as a teacher at a local SW MO college. He has been in politics and made a very lucrative career of it. He is the epitomy of what is wrong in our polical system. Thanks for nothing.

Steve 851 says: "the only mandate that should be required is for basic major medical coverage.. Beyond that, people should be able to choose and pay for what additional coverage they may want."

And just exactly what is "basic major medical coverage?" Blunt's proposal would give your employer the right to define what that "basic" medical coverage is. Set aside contraception for the moment (which for women IS basic medical). Blunt's proposal means that your employer could forbid your company insurance policy to cover ANY procedure they object to even "basics" such as invasive surgery, blood transfusions, kidney dialysis... ANYTHING they object to. See the problem? It effectively throws everyone into the private insurance market and does away with lower cost employee insurance programs or guts them so that you would need a private policy anyway. Do you really want to pay $1200 a month for a comprehensive policy because your employer has decided they have a "moral" objection to modern medicine?

All of the attacks on Obamacare do not address the issues that produced the Heathcare Act in the first place - that millions of uninsured Americans have no access to health care until they show up in emergency rooms where they must be treated - forcing the rest of us to absorb the cost in our own healthcare premiums or in taxes. Got a better solution? I am all ears. The best solution of course would be something like the Canadian healthcare system, but everyone screams socialism at even a whisper of that approach.

I hope that Mr. Blunt and those other in the house, who are concern about healthcare. will stand up to Mr. Obama. In particular, Obama's attack on the current healthcare available to active service military and retired. He and his administration are in the process of slashing military healthcare! Our soldiers made a commitment to serve this country. Many have laid there life down, while others still endure the injuries that they received. How could any president demean this? To me, this is an act of "Treason" and a betrayal on the part of President Obama. He took an oath of office "to defend and protect", and I have not seen him personally do a single act himself. It is the military that has to go out and do the dangerous work of "defending" the country. That is far more serious than a bruise earned playing a pickup game of basketball. He really does not get it? These soldiers who he has fighting a capricious war for him, deserve better. As do all of those who have served this country proudly. Mr. Blunt, stand up for these soldiers and veterans. And "we the people" will do the same in November. Show them that you have their backs. www.bush-it-usa.com

Contrary to what everybody thinks, no employer is paying for the employee's benefits - it is the employee who is paying for it. The employer is merely a facilitator for the insurance policy, and as such, cannot exempt employees from getting coverage.

Any employer who provides benefits over the amount of services provided by the employee is giving things away for free - employers will go bankrupt if they compensate employees for more than they have received in services.

Funny how the same Christians and Tea Partiers that were all up in arms last year over the Islamic Center/Mosque that was being built near Ground Zero in NY are the ones now crying "Religious Freedom!" over contraceptives. What a bunch of frothy hypocrites!